[Dnsmasq-discuss] Running multiple instances of dnsmasq in a fail-over configuration

[Tom Metro]

I looked through the list archives to see what was recommended for
running multiple instances of dnsmasq in a fail-over configuration, and
the answer seemed to be to run ISC DHCPd instead.

My preference would be to stick with dnsmasq. I'm actually less
concerned with having redundant DHCP services than redundant DNS, but
given that the DHCP half of dnsmasq informs the DNS half of local hosts,
there's still a need to synchronize the leases among multiple instances.
Seeing as the slave instance wouldn't need to respond to DHCP packets,
it would greatly simplifies the fail-over coordination.

Have you considered adding support for DHCP Failover Protocol
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-failover-12)?

Has anyone rigged up a lease synchronization scheme external to dnsmasq
using the --dhcp-script feature (just mentioned in another thread) or
perhaps DBus?

 -Tom

-- 
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/